We need to understand

York Press: We need to understand We need to understand

I can neither answer yes nor no to Matthew Laverack (Letters, January 22).

Mr Laverack fails to understand that peoples’ circumstances can change – national statistics show that more than half of the UK’s population is one pay-packet away from losing their home.

Mr Laverack also assumes that those in poverty with televisions and tattoos have been out and bought them while in poverty. Has he not considered that they could have been bought when in employment or that they were a gift?

I would also point out that it is not so easy for many to stop smoking –nicotine is a drug and many people cannot just give up, which his letter seems to suggest.

Unless you actually speak to those in poverty, and understand their struggles, you cannot make such sweeping comments on appearance or possessions.

We need to understand that those in poverty today cover the range of social classes, yet those who comment on poverty unnecessarily seem to castigate just one.

Coun Tracey Simpson-Laing Deputy leader, City of York Council, Chair health and wellbeing board.

Comments (16)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:05am Tue 4 Feb 14

The Great Buda says...

You are wasting your time, he won't listen; or rather, he won't understand.
You are wasting your time, he won't listen; or rather, he won't understand. The Great Buda
  • Score: 9

2:41pm Tue 4 Feb 14

TheTruthHurts says...

What a surprise. TSL answers a question with neither a yes or no. Have you ever given a straight answer on anything Tracey?
What a surprise. TSL answers a question with neither a yes or no. Have you ever given a straight answer on anything Tracey? TheTruthHurts
  • Score: -10

4:54pm Tue 4 Feb 14

roadwars says...

TheTruthHurts wrote:
What a surprise. TSL answers a question with neither a yes or no. Have you ever given a straight answer on anything Tracey?
A good letter that answers with a much better explanation than just a simple yes or no.
Now, what was the question?...
[quote][p][bold]TheTruthHurts[/bold] wrote: What a surprise. TSL answers a question with neither a yes or no. Have you ever given a straight answer on anything Tracey?[/p][/quote]A good letter that answers with a much better explanation than just a simple yes or no. Now, what was the question?... roadwars
  • Score: -8

5:11pm Tue 4 Feb 14

Tug job says...

I would like to know what Mr Laverack's views are on those who persistently defraud the benefits system. I wonder why he doesn't comment on this.
I would like to know what Mr Laverack's views are on those who persistently defraud the benefits system. I wonder why he doesn't comment on this. Tug job
  • Score: -7

5:43pm Tue 4 Feb 14

Rocking Horse says...

Mr Laverack also assumes that those in poverty with televisions and tattoos have been out and bought them while in poverty. Has he not considered that they could have been bought when in employment or that they were a gift?


This is a sign of desperation, one that says, 'I've lost the argument, so, I'll say something stupid' !

Give up, and don't dig that hole any deeper councillor.

Matthew has buried you band your weak argument.

The current definition of 'poverty' is a cynical political construct, that the Fabian Marxists including the JRF are using to push their far left agenda. There is a movement within local government and the 'third sector' trying to subvert democracy. The signs that you look for to see if a suspect is a member of the cult can be found by looking at their twitter profiles:-

1. Do they follow Labour MP's.
2. Do they follow far left commentators like Polly Toynbee, Owen Jones, David Aaranovitch, Alastair Campbell, Danny Blanchflower, Matthew Taylor, or Mehdi Hassan ?
3. Do they follow charities like, DEMOS, NESTAS, FutureGov, Young Foundation, JRF ?
4. Do they follow 'The Illuminati' ?
5. Do they follow 'TED'
6. Are they involved with 'social innovation' ?
7. Are they Common Purpose 'graduates' ?

The earlier they follow these on their profile, and the more of them they follow, the more marxist their political agenda is.

There are several within City of York Council and at JRF who get near perfect scores on the 'Marxist-ometer', going well into the 'RED' danger zone !

Look out for them !!!
[quote] Mr Laverack also assumes that those in poverty with televisions and tattoos have been out and bought them while in poverty. Has he not considered that they could have been bought when in employment or that they were a gift? [/quote] This is a sign of desperation, one that says, 'I've lost the argument, so, I'll say something stupid' ! Give up, and don't dig that hole any deeper councillor. Matthew has buried you band your weak argument. The current definition of 'poverty' is a cynical political construct, that the Fabian Marxists including the JRF are using to push their far left agenda. There is a movement within local government and the 'third sector' trying to subvert democracy. The signs that you look for to see if a suspect is a member of the cult can be found by looking at their twitter profiles:- 1. Do they follow Labour MP's. 2. Do they follow far left commentators like Polly Toynbee, Owen Jones, David Aaranovitch, Alastair Campbell, Danny Blanchflower, Matthew Taylor, or Mehdi Hassan ? 3. Do they follow charities like, DEMOS, NESTAS, FutureGov, Young Foundation, JRF ? 4. Do they follow 'The Illuminati' ? 5. Do they follow 'TED' 6. Are they involved with 'social innovation' ? 7. Are they Common Purpose 'graduates' ? The earlier they follow these on their profile, and the more of them they follow, the more marxist their political agenda is. There are several within City of York Council and at JRF who get near perfect scores on the 'Marxist-ometer', going well into the 'RED' danger zone ! Look out for them !!! Rocking Horse
  • Score: -36

5:46pm Tue 4 Feb 14

Rocking Horse says...

Tug job wrote:
I would like to know what Mr Laverack's views are on those who persistently defraud the benefits system. I wonder why he doesn't comment on this.
He's got bigger fish to fry, mate.

Don't try and smear him, he'll sue !
[quote][p][bold]Tug job[/bold] wrote: I would like to know what Mr Laverack's views are on those who persistently defraud the benefits system. I wonder why he doesn't comment on this.[/p][/quote]He's got bigger fish to fry, mate. Don't try and smear him, he'll sue ! Rocking Horse
  • Score: -26

6:51pm Tue 4 Feb 14

tonyfromitaly says...

Tug job wrote:
I would like to know what Mr Laverack's views are on those who persistently defraud the benefits system. I wonder why he doesn't comment on this.
Perhaps you would elaborate your comment for those of us who havnt a clue what your on about.
[quote][p][bold]Tug job[/bold] wrote: I would like to know what Mr Laverack's views are on those who persistently defraud the benefits system. I wonder why he doesn't comment on this.[/p][/quote]Perhaps you would elaborate your comment for those of us who havnt a clue what your on about. tonyfromitaly
  • Score: -16

9:49pm Tue 4 Feb 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

Aw, why did TSL have to feed the troll? Should have kept a dignified silence.
Best case would have been an end to it but now because one of ML's sworn adversaries has responded we'll have to endure more simplistic nonsense and thinly veiled grudge. Great.
Aw, why did TSL have to feed the troll? Should have kept a dignified silence. Best case would have been an end to it but now because one of ML's sworn adversaries has responded we'll have to endure more simplistic nonsense and thinly veiled grudge. Great. Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: 33

9:53pm Tue 4 Feb 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

Rocking Horse wrote:
Tug job wrote:
I would like to know what Mr Laverack's views are on those who persistently defraud the benefits system. I wonder why he doesn't comment on this.
He's got bigger fish to fry, mate.

Don't try and smear him, he'll sue !
Because half an allusion is obviously a lot worse than directly saying that a choker covers up the adams apple and can be attached to the lead of the subversive marxist cult.

Jeez.
[quote][p][bold]Rocking Horse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tug job[/bold] wrote: I would like to know what Mr Laverack's views are on those who persistently defraud the benefits system. I wonder why he doesn't comment on this.[/p][/quote]He's got bigger fish to fry, mate. Don't try and smear him, he'll sue ![/p][/quote]Because half an allusion is obviously a lot worse than directly saying that a choker covers up the adams apple and can be attached to the lead of the subversive marxist cult. Jeez. Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: 36

12:13am Wed 5 Feb 14

Rocking Horse says...

Buzzz Light-year wrote:
Rocking Horse wrote:
Tug job wrote: I would like to know what Mr Laverack's views are on those who persistently defraud the benefits system. I wonder why he doesn't comment on this.
He's got bigger fish to fry, mate. Don't try and smear him, he'll sue !
Because half an allusion is obviously a lot worse than directly saying that a choker covers up the adams apple and can be attached to the lead of the subversive marxist cult. Jeez.
You really are on another planet, aren't you ?
[quote][p][bold]Buzzz Light-year[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rocking Horse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tug job[/bold] wrote: I would like to know what Mr Laverack's views are on those who persistently defraud the benefits system. I wonder why he doesn't comment on this.[/p][/quote]He's got bigger fish to fry, mate. Don't try and smear him, he'll sue ![/p][/quote]Because half an allusion is obviously a lot worse than directly saying that a choker covers up the adams apple and can be attached to the lead of the subversive marxist cult. Jeez.[/p][/quote]You really are on another planet, aren't you ? Rocking Horse
  • Score: -27

7:28am Wed 5 Feb 14

tonyfromitaly says...

Rocking Horse wrote:
Buzzz Light-year wrote:
Rocking Horse wrote:
Tug job wrote: I would like to know what Mr Laverack's views are on those who persistently defraud the benefits system. I wonder why he doesn't comment on this.
He's got bigger fish to fry, mate. Don't try and smear him, he'll sue !
Because half an allusion is obviously a lot worse than directly saying that a choker covers up the adams apple and can be attached to the lead of the subversive marxist cult. Jeez.
You really are on another planet, aren't you ?
Hes on another bottle if you ask me.
[quote][p][bold]Rocking Horse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Buzzz Light-year[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rocking Horse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tug job[/bold] wrote: I would like to know what Mr Laverack's views are on those who persistently defraud the benefits system. I wonder why he doesn't comment on this.[/p][/quote]He's got bigger fish to fry, mate. Don't try and smear him, he'll sue ![/p][/quote]Because half an allusion is obviously a lot worse than directly saying that a choker covers up the adams apple and can be attached to the lead of the subversive marxist cult. Jeez.[/p][/quote]You really are on another planet, aren't you ?[/p][/quote]Hes on another bottle if you ask me. tonyfromitaly
  • Score: -2

8:33am Wed 5 Feb 14

Buzzz Light-year says...

Rocking Horse wrote:
Buzzz Light-year wrote:
Rocking Horse wrote:
Tug job wrote: I would like to know what Mr Laverack's views are on those who persistently defraud the benefits system. I wonder why he doesn't comment on this.
He's got bigger fish to fry, mate. Don't try and smear him, he'll sue !
Because half an allusion is obviously a lot worse than directly saying that a choker covers up the adams apple and can be attached to the lead of the subversive marxist cult. Jeez.
You really are on another planet, aren't you ?
If you mean a different planet to you then thankfully yes.
You've reeeally been going off on one these last couple of weeks, eh?
[quote][p][bold]Rocking Horse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Buzzz Light-year[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rocking Horse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tug job[/bold] wrote: I would like to know what Mr Laverack's views are on those who persistently defraud the benefits system. I wonder why he doesn't comment on this.[/p][/quote]He's got bigger fish to fry, mate. Don't try and smear him, he'll sue ![/p][/quote]Because half an allusion is obviously a lot worse than directly saying that a choker covers up the adams apple and can be attached to the lead of the subversive marxist cult. Jeez.[/p][/quote]You really are on another planet, aren't you ?[/p][/quote]If you mean a different planet to you then thankfully yes. You've reeeally been going off on one these last couple of weeks, eh? Buzzz Light-year
  • Score: 0

9:21am Wed 5 Feb 14

The Great Buda says...

Rocking Horse wrote:
Mr Laverack also assumes that those in poverty with televisions and tattoos have been out and bought them while in poverty. Has he not considered that they could have been bought when in employment or that they were a gift?


This is a sign of desperation, one that says, 'I've lost the argument, so, I'll say something stupid' !

Give up, and don't dig that hole any deeper councillor.

Matthew has buried you band your weak argument.

The current definition of 'poverty' is a cynical political construct, that the Fabian Marxists including the JRF are using to push their far left agenda. There is a movement within local government and the 'third sector' trying to subvert democracy. The signs that you look for to see if a suspect is a member of the cult can be found by looking at their twitter profiles:-

1. Do they follow Labour MP's.
2. Do they follow far left commentators like Polly Toynbee, Owen Jones, David Aaranovitch, Alastair Campbell, Danny Blanchflower, Matthew Taylor, or Mehdi Hassan ?
3. Do they follow charities like, DEMOS, NESTAS, FutureGov, Young Foundation, JRF ?
4. Do they follow 'The Illuminati' ?
5. Do they follow 'TED'
6. Are they involved with 'social innovation' ?
7. Are they Common Purpose 'graduates' ?

The earlier they follow these on their profile, and the more of them they follow, the more marxist their political agenda is.

There are several within City of York Council and at JRF who get near perfect scores on the 'Marxist-ometer', going well into the 'RED' danger zone !

Look out for them !!!
You really are bonkers.
[quote][p][bold]Rocking Horse[/bold] wrote: [quote] Mr Laverack also assumes that those in poverty with televisions and tattoos have been out and bought them while in poverty. Has he not considered that they could have been bought when in employment or that they were a gift? [/quote] This is a sign of desperation, one that says, 'I've lost the argument, so, I'll say something stupid' ! Give up, and don't dig that hole any deeper councillor. Matthew has buried you band your weak argument. The current definition of 'poverty' is a cynical political construct, that the Fabian Marxists including the JRF are using to push their far left agenda. There is a movement within local government and the 'third sector' trying to subvert democracy. The signs that you look for to see if a suspect is a member of the cult can be found by looking at their twitter profiles:- 1. Do they follow Labour MP's. 2. Do they follow far left commentators like Polly Toynbee, Owen Jones, David Aaranovitch, Alastair Campbell, Danny Blanchflower, Matthew Taylor, or Mehdi Hassan ? 3. Do they follow charities like, DEMOS, NESTAS, FutureGov, Young Foundation, JRF ? 4. Do they follow 'The Illuminati' ? 5. Do they follow 'TED' 6. Are they involved with 'social innovation' ? 7. Are they Common Purpose 'graduates' ? The earlier they follow these on their profile, and the more of them they follow, the more marxist their political agenda is. There are several within City of York Council and at JRF who get near perfect scores on the 'Marxist-ometer', going well into the 'RED' danger zone ! Look out for them !!![/p][/quote]You really are bonkers. The Great Buda
  • Score: -1

3:37pm Wed 5 Feb 14

Dr Robert says...

Once again it looks like Simpson- Laing has put out the word to Yorks Labour voters to mark down anything in these columns that does not follow her line of thinking.
Once again it looks like Simpson- Laing has put out the word to Yorks Labour voters to mark down anything in these columns that does not follow her line of thinking. Dr Robert
  • Score: -2

6:09pm Wed 5 Feb 14

Rocking Horse says...

Dr Robert wrote:
Once again it looks like Simpson- Laing has put out the word to Yorks Labour voters to mark down anything in these columns that does not follow her line of thinking.
It's just one sad nutjob, who sadly follows the Council regime of nutjobs !

Note who gets a +ve thumbs up score, BTW ;-)
[quote][p][bold]Dr Robert[/bold] wrote: Once again it looks like Simpson- Laing has put out the word to Yorks Labour voters to mark down anything in these columns that does not follow her line of thinking.[/p][/quote]It's just one sad nutjob, who sadly follows the Council regime of nutjobs ! Note who gets a +ve thumbs up score, BTW ;-) Rocking Horse
  • Score: -2

9:45pm Wed 5 Feb 14

CaroleBaines says...

Rocking Horse wrote:
Tug job wrote:
I would like to know what Mr Laverack's views are on those who persistently defraud the benefits system. I wonder why he doesn't comment on this.
He's got bigger fish to fry, mate.

Don't try and smear him, he'll sue !
But this comment was just asking a question. Why would Mr Laverack sue and how do you know his intentions?

Sometimes the comments on this forum really leave me in a confused state. Why do people have to gang up and take sides? Its just about commenting on things in York is it not?
[quote][p][bold]Rocking Horse[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Tug job[/bold] wrote: I would like to know what Mr Laverack's views are on those who persistently defraud the benefits system. I wonder why he doesn't comment on this.[/p][/quote]He's got bigger fish to fry, mate. Don't try and smear him, he'll sue ![/p][/quote]But this comment was just asking a question. Why would Mr Laverack sue and how do you know his intentions? Sometimes the comments on this forum really leave me in a confused state. Why do people have to gang up and take sides? Its just about commenting on things in York is it not? CaroleBaines
  • Score: 2

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree